Forum menu
why do you throw your toys out of the pram when someone exhibits the same behaviour that you do?
Is that ^^ aimed at me? There is no toy throwing going on, I'm just saying that I'm not really interested discussing indepth the Ukraine war - if I was I would do it on the Ukraine war thread.
And by the looks of it nor is anyone else. So what is the problem, and why would it involve a pram and some toys?
Has the dreadful old narcissist Magic Grandad been missing the attention, despite the cult members/sixth formers/PFJ all tweeting him every day to remind him that he’s some kind of messiah, so he thought he’d pop back and remind us all how utterly detached from reality he is?
Thought so
Carry on…
Could it be that the reason that some people are so venomous when Jeremy Corbyn is mentioned is that for many he represented hope...
Instead we witnessed the lengths the powers that be will go to to crush those that threaten real change to the system
Instead we witnessed the lengths the powers that be will go to to crush those that threaten real change to the system
I think it's childish to resort to "actors off stage" and "conspiracies in the corridors of power" to explain the failure of Corbyn when the more obvious reasons are staring us all in the face. in 2019 lots of the electorate (for whatever reason) found Corbyn not to their liking, The manifesto was largely held to be unbelievable (the free broadband was a disaster on the doorstep) he (and the labour front bench) was unclear about what they stood for over Brexit, They took the votes of northern working class people for granted, and the election campaign was poor.
That's it, no conspiracy needed.
This thread was specifically revived to spread the patently false claim that Corbyn supports Putin.
This persistent false smear has been exposed as such by Peter Oborne, a man who is clearly not a huge Corbyn fan and, as you have pointed out Nick, he has labelled him a "failed politician".
Far from being a Putin fan Corbyn consistently warned of the dangers posed by Putin whilst other senior UK politicians either remained silent or cosied up to him and his russian oligarchs.
Which makes his appearance on a news channel that is one of the very few outside of Russia who are outwardly and predominately vocal in their support of Russia's invasion of Ukraine all the more odd, given his history of condemnation of Putin, no?
I mean surely the response to an invitation from them would be a polite; no thanks.
“actors off stage” and “conspiracies in the corridors of power”
Aye, sound...
That’s it, no conspiracy needed.
Aside from it has the obvious flaw in your theory of "in 2019 lots of the electorate (for whatever reason) found Corbyn not to their liking"
So how exactly did they conclude that? Did they meet him or was it what they read and heard on the news?
This is latest story is a great example really. The rather curious distilling of what he said into headlines designed to get people frothing.
Seems accurate in saying that just pouring weapons in is unlikely to end the war as opposed to having it just drag on as a stalemate (at least till Putin dies/removed from office and his replacement can use it as a handy excuse to end things) unless some diplomatic solution is found. I have doubts about one being found but its certainly worth some effort investing.
Corbyn put his faith in the Minsk agreement, and Putin not being worse than he thought, when that fell apart it just left two options, neither of which are really palatable for a pacifist.
The reality is that if Russia were to win and occupy Ukraine, history would repeat itself, tens of thousands would 'disappear', just like a lot of those in areas Russia occupies at present, Ukrainians aren't daft, they know it's either run or fight, the fact that the western world was shocked at the way this invasion happened tells a story, history will hopefully not look too kindly on the likes of Putin and Lukashenko.
So how exactly did they conclude that?
It's only one part of the reason why Labour failed in 2019. do you think they had a coherent Brexit strategy? Did you think they were a untied party ready for govt? Do you not think that they took great swathes of the populations vote for granted - and Corbyn was especially unpopular up here as the sort of I-Know-Best busybody out of touch London elite.
The problem I have with any conspiracy is the fact that it beguiles people to stop thinking about what actually went wrong. No one thinks Ed Miliband was a spectacular success, no one really thinks that Starmer is doing an amazing job, by excusing Corbyn's very obvious flaws who was both failed by his party and in turn failed to be a leader, those of us who claim to support Labour (our at the very least prefer them to the Tories) stop thinking coherently about how we should be doing better. There's more that unites us, etc etc.
This thread was specifically revived to spread the patently false claim that Corbyn supports Putin.
I imagine it was revived as he's back in the news so is the appropriate place to discuss the story? I could be miles off of course?
he’s back in the news
Is he? I wasn't aware.
He's in the news because of the same issue that pretty much made him unelectable, he sticks to his principles and doesn't really care about the publicity side of it, or that those who dislike him can use it as a way of demonising him, which they have in this instance. Corbyn has throughout his life fought against wars and oppression, both of which the Ukraine are suffering from because of Putin, so i'd seriously doubt he's a huge fan of Putin or any of his ilk.
YYYAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNN!
he sticks to his principles and doesn’t really care about the publicity side of it
It's true, imagine having a PM who has principles and sticks to them. We're clearly not ready for that sort of thing.
He’s in the news because.....
Fair enough, I must have missed it. Any links to the news stories which focus on Corbyn?
Edit: Just found this in the guardian.
The Guardian: Jeremy Corbyn urges west to stop arming Ukraine.
THEGUARDIAN.COM Seems like some reasonable comments, whether or not you totally agree with them. Nothing in it suggests support for Putin.
The story doesn't seem to be carried by major news providers such as Sky or the BBC, although I could be wrong.
For someone fighting desperately against this so called conspiracy theory you arent half doing a good job of supporting the basic claims.
Did you think they were a untied party ready for govt?
Ermm you mean like the Labour establishment were doing their best to undermine him?
Do you not think that they took great swathes of the populations vote for granted
Not really no. Hence the problem with the brexit strategy trying to appeal to all people. Now if you applied this to the centrists you might have a point. Sadly though they havent learnt this lesson.
and Corbyn was especially unpopular up here as the sort of I-Know-Best busybody out of touch London elite.
Again and why was that? Was it perhaps because he didnt actually fit into the London media elite like Johnson or Cummings and got treated appropriately?
The problem I have with any conspiracy is the fact that it beguiles people to stop thinking about what actually went wrong.
Whereas the problem I have with your conspiracy theory slur approach is you are trying to declare certain issues beyond discussion.
Again and why was that?
Because he's a know-it-all busybody?
trying to declare certain issues beyond discussion.
Not at all, knock yourself out, just don't expect me to take it seriously I used to be a member of the labour party in High Wycombe in the 80's. There was one old member who carried around a tatty folder full of press and cuttings about Harold Wilson, he was convinced there was a conspiracy to remove him from power, and thought that MI5 was watching him.
Plus ca change, plus c'est meme chose
As far as I can tell, the last two Labour leaders and the current one have all been shocking choices, none of them seem to have or had a clue. I think until Labour choose a leader that is both inspirational and looks half way competent to the electorate; years of opposition beckon.
Ah, fair play, that is pretty much the exact situation we find ourselves in now, so I'm happy to dismiss the Forde report and the evidence showing Joan Ryan's collaboration with a foreign power.
Not at all, knock yourself out, just don’t expect me to take you seriously
I am heartbroken by the idea.
I notice you fail to address anything but just keep on with the gish gallop though.
Wilson, of course, is a rather complex area but one we are unlikely to get good answers either way on. There does seem to be evidence for at least some members of MI5 unofficially working against him.
It's all the "discussion" deserves.
Constant editing is always sure to spice up a discussion...
Kinda forgot just how cunning and dishonest some folk can be when it comes to politics...
Like many on here, I voted for Corbyn in 2017 but had despaired of him by 2019. Not because of his principles but because I thought of him as a failed politian even then. Nice guy but a bit clueless and too gullible by far, too busy digging holes for himself.
There is nothing in that Peter Oborne article that I have a problem with though, wether I agree entirely or not.
Had Corbyn done the honorable thing and resigned after losing the first time than he might be a more respected voice now.
Ah, fair play, that is pretty much the exact situation we find ourselves in now, so I’m happy to dismiss the Forde report and the evidence showing Joan Ryan’s collaboration with a foreign power.
This was of course in response to your original post, prior to the edit...
I was hearing last night, no paper evidence or names, that there's a possibility that Jeremy Corbyn might run for Islington North or for Mayor of London. That could be fun and give people a bit (!) more of a real choice. The mayor role would allow for a more widespread team of door-knockers and canvassers. Will they drag up all that AS nonsense again or will it be down to the price of his raincoat or ULEZ?
He would have a reasonable chance of getting re-elected as MP. He seens to be well-regarded locally as a working constituency MP. It depends on how much the electorate like him and remember his name compared to the Labour brand. He would get demolished in mayoral elections.
As to whether anti-semitism becomes a major issue again, I suppose it depends what his attitude to anti-semitism is going to be. Will he write any more forewords to books without mentioning the anti-semitism within? Is he gonna present any more TV shows for Iranian state media? Is he gonna call for anti-Semitic graffiti to be preserved? Will he call Hamas friends again and tell Zionists they haven't lived in the UK long enough to understand irony? It really is up to him.
Blimey, that was all well rehearsed. I think he'd stand a good chance on a mayoral election. The LP's resonse I imagine would be ferocious.
Blimey, that was all well rehearsed
Yup, Corbyn still poses a threat to "centrist" hegemony. They will never take a threat from him lightly.
Unfortunately if he did become mayor, I could foresee the PLP working against him with such ferocity that the people of London would be collateral damage in their efforts to undermine him.
So as much as I would like that message to be sent with him becoming mayor, it might be better if he just won Islington.
He's 74 years old now, think it's time to retire and just work on what he wants too, he'd be 80 years old by the end of either term going by the election timelines.
Blimey, that was all well rehearsed.
Maybe because it's all been discussed a million times.
Any one of those things would be enough to exclude the man from any sensible discussion in normal times. Jacob Rees Mogg gets (rightly) slated for presenting a show on GB News. Corbyn presents a phone in for a theocratic regime's TV channel and self-professed lefties don't see the problem!
Corbyn's an independent now, so whatever his views that he shows on TV or whatever aren't really much of a concern.
The concern is that he's getting on a bit now and does he have another 5-6 years in him, the Mayor of London is a big job, MP, not so much i guess as an indy, but either way, the biggest risk is he splits the votes and lets the tories in, especially for the Mayor role.
Excluding people from discussions? Not exactly socratic is it?
Unfortunately if he did become mayor, I could foresee the PLP working against him with such ferocity that the people of London would be collateral damage in their efforts to undermine him.
Therefore the need to placate them and stop them from throwing their toys from their prams?
Being held to political ransom by right-wingers who otherwise promise mayhem might be an effective strategy for them but I am not convinced that it should be encouraged.
Therefore the need to placate them and stop them from throwing their toys from their prams?
I guess it worked for the tories against Khan with all the requirements they placed on TFL.
So new new labour might as well continue it.
Corbyn presents a phone in for a theocratic regime’s TV channel and self-professed lefties don’t see the problem!
'cos having alternative viewpoints on different platforms is such a bad thing.
Whereas I have a right-winger running our democratic socialist party. Nothing to see here.
Starmer also seems to enjoy the Murdoch factor - but he's got to get those Tory votes you know. That's because he hasn't got any other argument.
Being held to political ransom by right-wingers who otherwise promise mayhem might be an effective strategy for them but I am not convinced that it should be encouraged.
As the labour right successfully did in previous elections when Corbyn was leder. they would rather be in opposition than to accept anyone slightly left of centre. this is the really weird one. Corbyn proposed nothing outlandish or that would not be normal policies for social democratic parties Europe wide
I reckon it is probably fair to say that Labour's election manifestos under Corbyn were not that dissimilar to Tory election manifestos pre-Thatcher. Possibly a tad more right-wing.
I think that is pushing it a bit but certainly nothing out of the mainstream
I think that is pushing it a bit
Not really, off the top of my head pre-Thatcher Tory governments supported nationalisation of gas, electricity, water, telecommunications, transport, governments bailouts of the car industry, steel, and various others. Very low VAT and basic tax rate. Very high income tax on high earners, luxury tax on some nonessentials.
Corbyn fell well short of promising all those things in his election manifestos so imo that put him to the right of pre-Thatcher Tory governments.
Cummings’ advice to Corbyn’s team:
EXC: Dominic Cummings secretly advised Jeremy Corbyn's team on path to No 10 at the height of the Brexit impasseVote Leave supremo provided Labour leadership with a plan to make Corbyn PM by voting for Theresa May's Brexit dealFirst extract from GET INwww.thetimes.com/article/0bb8...
— Patrick Maguire (@patrickmaguire.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T22:49:25.135Z
[ it’s a Times article, feel free to add an archive link for all to read ]
For clarity, the above link is to a Times article that reports Cummings offered to make Corbyn PM.
An interesting story. Although the only thing which actually counts is the final paragraph......
Eventually, however, Corbyn did endorse a second referendum. And Cummings went to work for Johnson. He did for Boris what he might have done for Jeremy. The Tories were remade as a party of Brexit. Johnson read the lines that had been written for Corbyn — get Brexit done, Labour don’t respect democracy — and annihilated him. The unlikely beneficiary was the man responsible for the party’s position, the man Cummings derided as a “central casting London Remain beta-brain lawyer”: Keir Starmer.